Geochemistry of the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada, and the unconformity-related uranium deposits hosted by it
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A large data set comprising near-total digestion analyses of whole rock samples from the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada (based principally on the Geological Survey of Canada open file 7495), containing more than 20,000 analyses, was used to define the average chemical composition of Athabasca Group sandstones and of unconformity-related uranium deposits hosted by the basin. The chemical composition of unaltered and un-mineralized Athabasca Group sandstones is dominated by Al (median Al2O3 of 1.14 wt.%), Fe (median Fe2O3 of 0.24 wt.%), and K (median K2O of 0.11 wt.%; Si was not measured), corresponding mostly to the presence of kaolin, illite, and hematite, in addition to the most-abundant quartz. The median concentration of U in the barren sandstones is 1 ppm, with 5 ppm Th, 3 ppm Pb, and 56 ppm ΣREE. Other trace elements present in significant amounts are Zr (median of 100 ppm), Sr (median of 69 ppm), and B (median of 43 ppm), corresponding to the presence of zircon, illite, and dravite. The elements most enriched in a typical Athabasca Basin unconformity-related uranium deposit relative to the barren sandstone are U (median enrichment of ×710), Bi (×175), V (×77), and Mg (×45), followed by five elements with enrichment factors between 20 and 30 (Co, Mo, K, As, and Ni). These correspond to the presence in the ore bodies of alteration minerals (dravite, kaolinite, illite, chlorite, aluminum-phosphate-sulfate minerals, and a suite of sulfide minerals) and are similar to what has been observed before. These elements are similar to the typical pathfinder elements described above known deposits, but their usefulness has to be assessed based on their relative mobility in the predominantly oxidizing Athabasca Basin sandstones.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".